(1.) INTER alia contending that the directions issued by this court in W.P.No.2134/2001 (S.S.Ahluwalia Vs. Union of India) and W.P.1045/1992 (Sardar Kuldeep Singh Vs. Union of India) on 24 -01 -2006 have not been complied with, this application for contempt has been filed in the year 2012 i.e. after a period of 6 years of passing of the order. On notice being issued, respondents have filed reply and now it is required to be determined as to whether contempt action should be taken or not. In the order dated 24 -01 -2006, in paras 8, 9 and 10, the following directions were issued by this court on 24 -01 -2006 :
(2.) NOW from the reply filed by the respondents and the compliance report submitted, it is seen that in case of each of the persons concerned, certain amount of compensation has been determined, quantification of compensation based on the directions according to the State Government has been done and the interest amount of 6% has also been paid. A detailed affidavit has been filed indicating all these facts and documents Annexures R -3 to R -7 have also been filed indicating the determination of compensation in case of each of the applicants and document Annexure R -6 has also been filed indicating quantification of interest at the rate of 6% in accordance to the directions issued. In para -9 of the order passed on 24 -01 -2006, the applicant by filing a detailed rejoinder has indicated that assessment of the compensation for loss caused has not been done properly. The applicants seriously disputed the compensation assessed and challenges the manner in which compensation has been determined .
(3.) WE have considered the rival contentions of the parties and we find that in the original order passed in the writ petition as reproduced hereinabove, there was no quantification of the compensation to be paid to each of the individual, only direction was given to the Collector to make assessment of the compensation for the loss caused and make payment within the stipulated period with interest at the rate of 6%. Now from the records, it is seen that the Collector has passed certain orders and determined the compensation and has also paid interest. However, the applicants are disputing the same and the contentions of the applicants are that the compensation has not been properly assessed . In the absence of there being any specific directions in the writ petition in the matter of assessment and quantification of the claim now in these contempt proceedings this court does not have jurisdiction to go into disputed question with regard to quantification of the compensation and giving any further directions for paying enhanced compensation. If the applicants feel the manner in which the quantification of the compensation has been done and the order has been passed by the Collector in quantifying the compensation is not proper or is illegal or erroneous, it gives a fresh cause to the applicants to challenge the quantification and claim enhanced compensation but in the absence of there being any specific directions for quantification of the compensation or any specific direction for calculation of the compensation in a particular manner it is not proper for this court to initiate action for contempt.